Names from Nowhere? Fictitious Country Names in Survey Vignettes Affect Experimental Results

Abstract

Using fictitious country names in hypothetical scenarios is widespread in experimental international relations research. We survey sixty-four peer-reviewed articles to find that it is justified by reference to necessary “neutralization” compared to real-world scenarios. However, this neutralization effect has not been independently tested. Indeed, psychology and toponymy scholarship suggest that names entail implicit cues that can inadvertently bias survey results. We use a survey experiment to test neutralization and naming effects. We find not only limited evidence for neutralization, but also little evidence for systematic naming effects. Instead, we find that respondents were often more willing to support using force against fictitious countries than even adversarial real-world countries. Real-world associations may provide a “deterrent” effect not captured by hypothetical scenarios with fictitious country names. In turn, fictionalization may decrease the stakes as experienced by respondents. Researchers should therefore carefully explain rationales for and expected effects of fictitious country names, and test their fictitious names independently.

Pre-war experimental evidence that Putin’s propaganda elicited strong support for military invasion among Russians

“…In particular, the substantial effects of statements from Putin on his supporters' willingness to use military force contrasts with the inconsistent elite cue effects found by previous studies [e.g., (18)]. On top of this, given that we know respondents are more likely to support war in surveys with fictitious country names (50), the substantial effects we find in a survey with real countries further attest to the strength of the results. It suggests that the findings of our study, both with respect to provocations and leader cues, are not only consistent but also substantial.…”

Thinking generically and specifically in International Relations survey experiments

“…Schema inconsistency refers to the identity of a fixed country actor not being “reasonable given the scenario in which the actor is embedded” (Brutger et al, 2022a: 42). Countries mentioned by our non-compliers that do not possess or pursue nuclear weapons as of 2013 or do not have a history of seeking them-such as Bolivia, Canada, and Sudan-are schema-inconsistent, and countries such as Iran and Syria schema-consistent, following other work (Brutger et al, 2022a, 2022b; Majnemer and Meibauer, 2023). 5…”

“…1.Additionally, there is evidence that country identity can directly affect a dependent variable, such as U.K. respondents’ support for military action against a nuclear proliferator (Majnemer and Meibauer 2023). …”

Rethinking the Tradeoffs of Within-Subjects Designs in International Relations Experiments

“…However, conjoint experiments are gaining more popularity among experimental IR researchers (e.g. Avey et al, 2022;Kertzer, Renshon and Yarhi-Milo, 2021;Lim and Tanaka, 2022;Majnemer and Meibauer, 2023) and their tradeo s are worthy of scholarly attention.…”

“…Repeated-wave, within-subjects designs: Within-subjects designs in which all subjects are exposed to each condition of T successively over repeated waves Figure 1 illustrates the di erence between the three types of within-subjects experimental designs, displaying the order of items an example subject would receive in example single-module, 3Conjoint experiments also rely on within-subjects comparisons (e.g. Avey et al, 2022;Kertzer, Renshon and Yarhi-Milo, 2021;Hu and Kertzer, 2018;Lim and Tanaka, 2022;Majnemer and Meibauer, 2023) but are not a focus of this research note. multiple-module, and repeated-wave within-subjects designs with two levels/conditions for one within-subjects factor.…”